Replies

"President Bush's decision to waive sanctions on the PLO comes as his administration plans to try to jumpstart the dormant Middle East peace process."

That pretty much tells you the 'why'...no?

Not really. I don't see how waiving past acts of terrorism is going to promote anything even closely resembling a peace process. It hasn't worked in the past, and no one can explain to me how it is somehow supposed to work this time, either. It seems to me that we first need to drain the swamps of the terrorists before any meaningful peace process can happen.

It hasn't worked in the past, and no one can explain to me how it is somehow supposed to work this time, either. It seems to me that we first need to drain the swamps of the terrorists before any meaningful peace process can happen.

It wasn't Bush who dealt with this in the past and as for draining the swamps, Israel seems to be doing that.

Before jumping on Bush, how about we wait to see what the whole plan is.

Funny, you people carp about Bush, but ignore the fact that Israel "waives past acts of terrorism" against them ALL the time.

They put all the blame on Arafat, because it is convenient to do so, but Arafat's right there, and what do they do about him? They shoot up his house, but otherwise: Nothing.

Why not? People carp at Pres. Bush because we "don't have UbL yet," but UbL is hiding in a hole somewhere and not able to do a d*mn thing to us. Arafat is RIGHT THERE, and the Israelis just let him alone. If we had UbL cornered in a house in Afghanistan or Pakistan, how long would he remain free, hm?

Why do the Israelis allow Arafat to remain free? Because when they nab him, and put him in the hole, and the terror continues, who are they going to have for their sycophantic little butt-kissers to blame? No one. Arafat is a convenient scape-goat, but only if he's free.

In 1998, Abu Abbas was in Gaza, and everyone knew it. He held press conferences where he said he was trying to do things differently, was "renouncing terror" as a means for political change. He met along with others of the P.A., and cast votes in their proceedings.

The Israelis did NOTHING to him. Why? Who knows.

They do things like this ALL the time, yet to you silly ninnies, they are just BRILLIANT.

Yet if BUSH, who has far, far more success so far in pulling terror organizations out by the roots than anyone else ever has, plays the finesse game, pseudo-intellects like you people are all over him.

What I want to know is this: Why are you so enamoured of Israel, and so contemptuous of the United States, and yet you continue to live here? Is it that you're cowards, and don't want to deal with the terror "over there?"

I mean, somebody 'splain this to me.

I don't see how waiving past acts of terrorism is going to promote anything even closely resembling a peace process. It hasn't worked in the past, and no one can explain to me how it is somehow supposed to work this time, either. It seems to me that we first need to drain the swamps of the terrorists before any meaningful peace process can happen.

With rare exceptions, acts of terrorism by the PLO have not been directed towards Americans. Achille Lauro was done by PLF, an offshoot of PLO.

I would say a comparable situation would be negotiating with the Irish Republican Army and the Orange Men of Northern Island.